The anatomy of a vote is quite complex. Voting is often emotional, critical, political and a variety of other adjectives that end in "cal." We don't want to write a manifesto here, but we did want to send some thoughts out into the universe.

Vote from the gut: often your first reaction is the right answer.

Be a snipper, not a six shooter.

If you need to over compensate: do it with a red corvette, not a 10.

The word, vote, only has one syllable, comments should have many.

Take into account skill level: not everyone is a Jedi Knight, help the Padawan learners so they don't turn to the dark side.

Just say no to photo gangs: one day you're shooting f/8, the next f/22. It's not a good road to travel.

And finally: If you want to see it again, Fav it!

Do you have a "rule" you'd like to add? Let's have some fun with this...

What others are saying...

(@BearConceptions) John Poyner said:

March 8th, 2012 (11:47am) PST

Mr. 6 is back.... .this is BS, to not get any comment, but to be downgraded by a idiot troll.Or is it a "PRO" that is trying to keep his pictures on top of the rated list???? Or maybe a combination of him and his buddies???? Yes, I have seen a pattern, and one person is always connected to the "Mr. 6" as a friend.I am a nobody on this site, a hobbyist, striving to be better... but I do have limits of whatI can put up with, and I refuse to put up with cowards, who can not stand behind their vote with enough conviction to comment on them, or who use subversive methods to get on top themselves....72dpi will be full of anarchy if you do not make people accountable...because sooner or later "REVENGE" voting will take place.Why not, if they can, why not everyone.If someone can knock my pics down without so much as a Kiss My ASS... then I feel no remorse in going to their page and knocking them down a notch or two without a comment....Let the ANARCHY rule... And from what I am hearing,, it is already well on its way....Might as well do away with any
voting at all and become photobucket or flickr, or ..............
ll

(@Stentionhouse) Stention House said:

March 6th, 2012 (11:24pm) PST

Sorry, only just seen the reply here.
I would hope that there would be no voting retaliation for low votes...though there probably would be ;)But it does seem a similar pattern of strategic low voting is emerging here as it did at 500px.Someone sees a photo with a score higher than theirs, they give it a low score to knock it down.That kind of systematic tactical voting would soon become apparent if people had to leave comments with their votes and would, IMHO, add a bit of spice and constructive criticism to the site.

(@72dpi) 72dpi said (72dpi Admin):

March 4th, 2012 (1:52pm) PST

@Stention House: If votes made were publicly viewable, do you think that people might then be afraid to vote honestly, meaning if someone gives you an 8 and truly believes the image is worthy of an 8, in their opinion, and you see that 8 but feel the image should be rated better, does this lead to voting retaliation?

(@Stentionhouse) Stention House said:

March 3rd, 2012 (12:16pm) PST

I think it would be good if you could only vote if you also left a comment showing what score you gave.Personally, I'd like people to be honest but also let me know what they dislike about something they're giving a low score.
It's probably just as damaging in its own way giving a score higher than you really believe a photo should have as the opposite.I guess having no form of scoring at all is probably the only way of completely solving this issue...but a lot of people like scores...so long as they get good ones lol

(@Photobarx) Simon Barker said:

March 2nd, 2012 (10:38pm) PST

Perfectly summed up, Me. For that I'll give you a 10.
It's only in the past week or two that this attitude has become such a big issue. Of course, everyone would like their work to be seen, but who can honestly say their work deserves a ten, which should be reserved for the best of the best.
I like the idea of doing a self critique in the photo description as a way of encouraging feedback. This is what most people have said they want to get.

(@CharlieBaugh) Charlie Baugh said:

March 2nd, 2012 (7:23am) PST

I agree with Michael.

(@Cosmo) Cosmo said:

March 2nd, 2012 (1:55am) PST

Actually, I am looking quite relaxed at the voting over here on 72dpi.
The Mr. 6 or Mr. 7 issue on this site is somewhat annoying, but by far not as bad as enigmatic counting algorithms of anonymous dislike-votes on other sites that can hardly get compensated by positive votes, because here, at 72dpi, if the picture is really good it will get voted up again.
I can also accept living with Mr. 7 for the simple reason that there is no picture that everyone would like to the same degree. It's similar to the houses that I am selling in my "real life". There are homes that many people would kill their granny for, but which I personally don't like at all. However, I think that it's a good idea that there is now the option to block notorious "7ers" from voting.
Alltogether, the 72dpi is quite all right for me, considering that there is nothing like a system that would perfectly fit to everyone's needs. As it is now, it seems to me the best possible solution,

(@megspics) Meg Hamilton said:

March 1st, 2012 (10:46pm) PST

I am quickly losing faith in the ability of this site to meet my needs. I want my pic seen by as many people as possible,and I want feedback from other photographers, but find that as soon as I receive my first vote I disappear into oblivion. I checked on one of my pics that received a fair vote of 8 as soon as it was uploaded, which sent it spinning to no. 500 in the queue of shots. who will ever see it ! Then i spent over an hour commenting on the works of others to dredge up a couple of votes and comments. Finally my trusty friends from 500px weighed in with a couple more & the feedback on my photo was about 6 comments! I can't be spending hours on the computer commenting- I'd rather be out taking photos! Whatever the flaws in 500px , I feel I get a fair opportunity to be seen, & make new friends. Without the following I imported here I would have had 3 comments from strangers at best - just not worth the effort!

(@PHM68) Phillip Moers said:

March 1st, 2012 (9:16pm) PST

Michael D. Friedman said:
"It's really very simple.No rating system, no trolls. [...] Even faving should be done anonymously so there would be no pressure to return the favor. [...]"
BRAVO!!!
The first wise suggestion in this stupid and childish discussion of votings, trolls and so on!
THANK YOU!
PS:. And it's so simple:
Just throwing the voting out of the existing database. And everything will be fine!

(@Michael) Michael D. Friedman said:

March 1st, 2012 (8:38pm) PST

It's really very simple.No rating system, no trolls.
With no rating system people could make honest comments
from which we all can learn. Even faving should be done
anonymously so there would be no pressure to return the
favor.As I've suggested before, all images could be
rotated onto the site's feature pages, stay for two or
three days, and rotate again. Not perfect, but far
better and more productive than what we have now. To
answer objections about 'snapshots' being featured,
perhaps every image could be juried for minimum
quality before acceptance for uploading

(@BearConceptions) John Poyner said:

March 1st, 2012 (11:52am) PST

Here is an idea that hit me like a ton of bricks.. ( I am a little hard headed, so no worries) :)
How about when you get a vote, it sends it to your email and tells you who it was that voted and how they voted, like it does with comments?????
Yes, you need your notifications on, yes if you get a ton of votes it may blow up your email...but better than this anonymous BS...SOMEHOW, EVERYONE HAS TO BE ACCOUNTABLE.
This is a perfect example of what is wrong with the world today.Everyone looks around and goes "NOT MY FAULT"has to be someone else's fault.... there is not longer any accountability for anyone that wants to be a jerk.Gonna go bang my head on a concrete column, maybe that will help me to understand this way of thinking.Maybe I should have lived in an older era... where people took responsibility for their own actions....

(@BearConceptions) John Poyner said:

March 1st, 2012 (8:22am) PST

Eva, I agree with you completely, but at the same time, at least the people upstairs in the offices are listening and trying...
I do not think there is a solution that will make everyone happy or feel like it is fair every time....just to many personalities and ways to get around rules on the internet.Unless they start screening potential people who want to join, and checking IP addresses etc... there is just no way to police it all.

(@Maligne) Eva Lechner said:

March 1st, 2012 (7:36am) PST

I noticed that,it's O.K. ,I'll not allow frederico Rosselini,Herb Johnsen and... to vote on my photos but it's not a solution because the person or the persons who have created a multiple account can do it again.

(@BearConceptions) John Poyner said:

March 1st, 2012 (7:29am) PST

Has anyone noticed that there is now the option to not allow someone to vote on your photos? I was kind of shocked to find that this morning.Not sure it is a good thing or a bad thing, but someone is listening and trying different solutions.Thumbs up for that.

(@lovelyday3) said:

March 1st, 2012 (3:19am) PST

I'm very upset by the fact that we can not delete this account. And more, by the fact that it is easily possible to copy a picture with a right click. I think that it would be honest to give us the opportunity toremedy this!
I totally agree with Phillip, and Gerry. If I want delete my account here, and not simply log out, this is because I don't want to leave any photographs behind me...
So, HOW IS IT POSSIBLE TO DELETE IT?????

(@aolivera) Adrian Olivera said:

February 29th, 2012 (8:24pm) PST

I seems as though the "6er" has turned into a "7er".

(@paddler) said:

February 29th, 2012 (7:27pm) PST

Me,
Thank you.I will look into Zenfolio!Now, if I could just figure out how to delete my account here.John Poyner said to just log off and never sign in again.Perhaps, but I really don't like leaving loose ends lying around!!!!I don't think getting an email back is expecting too much from the owners of this site.

(@paddler) said:

February 29th, 2012 (7:05pm) PST

Philip,
The reason I signed on to this website was b/c of the 500px fiasco.However, this photo sharing site is a bit too strange for this old guy.Besides, the images I uploaded here were not very sharp and they were the same resolution as I have posted on Flickr, Pbase and 500px.They look fine there.I refuse to upload high resolution images on any of these websites.This is the first time for me that there is not a place to delete one's account on a photo sharing website.Plus, my email to do this has not been returned either.Something is not adding up here.

(@PHM68) Phillip Moers said:

February 29th, 2012 (3:36pm) PST

@ Gerry and @Laurence (and all):
That really is all very strange!
We give all our pictures on a big unknown.
Who is really behind it?
There is no imprint, no names, no numbers, no addresses!
And it does not even have the ability, as you would expect from any serious social network to be able to log off again.
Anyway, I'll just very skeptical about this site!

(@BearConceptions) John Poyner said:

February 29th, 2012 (3:20pm) PST

I love how someone gives you some good input, and a high rating, then within an hour, there is a 7 on your photos score knocking you out of the top photos... but NO COMMENTS... obviously someone is wanting that photo out of the top running, to move another photo up whether theirs or a buddies..without MANDATORY comments .. the scoring system is as corrupt as a politician...You have to make people accountable for their actions...

(@BearConceptions) John Poyner said:

February 29th, 2012 (3:09pm) PST

Delete your pictures and log off, and never log in again????Seems to be the easiest way to do this..

(@lovelyday3) said:

February 29th, 2012 (11:24am) PST

@Gerry : I also tried to delete my account but I did not succeed. So if someone can give me the information... Thanks!

(@paddler) said:

February 29th, 2012 (8:31am) PST

Hello,
Sorry to be off topic, but could someone please tell me how I delete my account on this site?I have emailed management but they haven't seen fit to tell me.
Thanks!

(@shuggie) Karl Williams said:

February 29th, 2012 (3:21am) PST

@me - what you say makes sense but it has flaws - mostly to do with sample size. Your normalisation will work well with people who have submitted upwards of 30 or 40 votes (i.e. the point at which an additional vote would make very little difference to the mean or standard deviation), but less well (in fact, "hardly at all" would be a better way of putting it) with people who've only submitted 5. As you rightly say - not rocket science, just statistics!

(@DominicUrbano-DELETED) Dominic Urbano said:

February 28th, 2012 (7:58pm) PST

This is interesting... I have been traveling for a few days and have just returned to see the changes and the conversation. Something that seems to be missing here is an acknowledgement that we all have our own standards for how to vote. If you don't have a criteria based system then you can not derive any meaning from the scores. (sorry... too many years as an educator) Someone is top heavy with 10's is no different than someone who is 'bottom' heavy with 6's. Is 1400+ 6 votes actually a lot? I don't know. (playing devils advocate here) How many photos are there in the 72dpi database? Maybe there are people out there who seek out nothing but what they consider a 6... and that is the only way they vote. Others may only seek out 10's to put their stamp on... you get the idea.
Revealing the user score history does very little to give real insight and may serve only to inflate ratings. We shall see. Maybe if 72dpi is going to reveal the score history it might also be a good idea to show what photos were scored so that some insight can be gained on how an individual judges photos.
In my own case the numbers for my voting are pretty consistent with how I think while I vote. Very few 10's (I think such a thing is rare) with the majority being an average '6'. I don't use less that 6 scores, not to avoid making comments, but because anything lower than a six would constitute a fail. Without criteria to score by it is impossible to 'fail'.

(@AForns) Alfred Forns said:

February 28th, 2012 (6:25pm) PST

Hi Carl Fully agree with your comments and they are right to the point !!! Sure hope things work out but starting to have my doubts !!
al

(@mezzoduomo) Jeff Morley said:

February 28th, 2012 (5:46pm) PST

My personal voting survival guide:
1)Give high numbers for images that touch my heart, and stay silent on those that don't.
2)Accept the votes given to me with no bitterness or frustration, and just go out and make more pictures I'm proud to share.
#2 is somewhat aspirational, but I'm committed.

(@drdab99) Doug Benner said:

February 28th, 2012 (5:31pm) PST

I would very much like to see this site become a center for meaningful feedback.It's a beautiful looking site and it obviously has a lot of talented people who have joined because they are serious about creating a helpful and positive community.
The administrators have said that our opinion matters.We'll see.So far they haven't acted like it.
I'm taking my photos down.I'm not leaving - I'm going to give the administrators more time.They must be busy with the recent influx of members and I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.But I won't have my photographs subject to the whims of trolls while the administrators response today is to act like it's a big joke.
My photography is not important in the general scheme of things.It is not my source of income.By itself, it means very little to this site.But it means something to me.I am not self-important but I do have some self-respect.And I won't subject something that I've worked on with sincere good intentions be capriciously toyed with by those whose only intent is to abuse others.

(@artographer) Scott Kroeker said:

February 28th, 2012 (5:06pm) PST

Just a thought, maybe offer the site owners a little patience. I am sure this is not their full-time job. You can't just snap your fingers and code magically writes itself. Give them a change to absorb what suggestions are being made and give them some grace time to sort things out. I am willing to tough out for a while.

(@FabsForns) said:

February 28th, 2012 (4:50pm) PST

I'm by no means a heavy contributor, but I will offer comments to the images I like, ignore the ones I don't like and keep as far away from voting as I can.
Anyone who chooses to comment on my images, please feel free not to vote.
This 1 to 10 system creates more problems than the dislike button we are running away from.
Hope it gets resolved at some point.

(@AForns) Alfred Forns said:

February 28th, 2012 (4:42pm) PST

I'm having some serious concerns over all that is going on and not sure what to do about it personally?
This is not rocket science and don't see why certain things are not stopped from the management side?
al

(@CreativeIsland) Peter Baumgarten said:

February 28th, 2012 (4:14pm) PST

A few people have mentioned - no photos = no votes. However, if I choose to be a troll, I can easily open a bogus account, upload countless crappy photos, use several computers (if IP addresses are checked) and easily find ways to abuse the system and spoil this experience for all the good people on this site. If I get caught and kicked off the site, I open up another account and do it all over again. Essentially, voting = abuse potential. Most of you have heard of the KISS rule. I think that applies here. A simple 'Like' button would suffice. If only one person likes your photo it won't be ranked very highly. If 1000 people like it - now you're talking!

(@drdab99) Doug Benner said:

February 28th, 2012 (3:32pm) PST

@sas astro - I love light-hearted humor. As humor the "voter survival guide" was nicely written.As a helpful response to the concerns expressed here...not so much.
Again, world peace is not at stake, and we're not curing cancer here.We are just enthusiastic photographers looking for some meaningful feedback, and making some suggestions as to what will and won't work.And the evidence for the numerical system here not working is painfully evident.
Have you ever tried to have a serious discussion about something (and it need not even be something all that important) and have someone not take you seriously?Don't you find that to be condescending and insulting?That's how I view the "voter survival guide".They had the chance to at least acknowledge the concerns here, and chose to ignore them.

(@drdab99) Doug Benner said:

February 28th, 2012 (3:14pm) PST

I appreciate the time and effort people are making at "outing" the trolls, but isn't it a little like playing whack-a-mole?
The trolls are here to stay as long as the numerical 1-10 system is in place.Either the administrators will take the problem seriously and adopt a more helpful attitude than the one displayed in the above "voter survival guide" or they will have a site which the photographers won't take seriously.People have emigrated from 500px in the hopes of finding a more fair-minded and responsive site.A lot of them will keep on moving if this site isn't what they are looking for.They may even rejoin 500px - their system, as flawed as it is far better than the nonsense going on here.

(@sasastro) sas astro said:

February 28th, 2012 (3:06pm) PST

@Doug Benner, I think a little light-hearted humour never hurt anyone, I htink the administrator has set the tome just right

(@ChrisRuefli) Chris Ruefli said:

February 28th, 2012 (2:44pm) PST

Only photographers with pictures should have the possibility to vote.

(@Maligne) Eva Lechner said:

February 28th, 2012 (2:26pm) PST

The third one is Paul Romer who votes 1,2,3 and then he will vote 10 and I have already an idea who is the photographer with multiple accounts,his rating is increasing.My pictures have got so many 1,2,3 this evening from 3 different persons registered in the last 3 hours,without image and no photos.

(@drdab99) Doug Benner said:

February 28th, 2012 (2:20pm) PST

The administrator who wrote the "voter survival guide" above is responding to the concerned discussions taking place on his/her site with a tone-deaf attempt at humor.
I know that world peace is not at stake here, and I can laugh at myself as easily (maybe even more easily) as the next guy, but I find the flip response to the sincere discussion on this board to be condescending and insulting.

(@BerndKinghorst) Bernd Kinghorst said:

February 28th, 2012 (2:03pm) PST

only comments could be better...so i agree with eva....

(@BerndKinghorst) Bernd Kinghorst said:

February 28th, 2012 (2:02pm) PST

usually i don`t care that much about a voting system...i care more about the ones who critisize or comment on my pics...because i want to learn from them...but i got several votings from Frederico,who has got not any pic in here...and that bothers me.....
maybe a solution of this problem could be,that people,who don`t share any pics in here,shouldn`t be able to vote.....i won`tz solve the problem at all...but may be it prevents us from these stupid people.....

(@Maligne) Eva Lechner said:

February 28th, 2012 (1:49pm) PST

And of course the same scenario,after the 1,2,3 votes on my pictures he voted 10 on 13 photos.Frederico Rosselini voted 10 on 27 pictures.Multiple accounts for sure!The best will be no rating system,just comments.

(@Maligne) Eva Lechner said:

February 28th, 2012 (1:42pm) PST

Right,I've got 1 and 2 from Herb Johnsen and then he deleted his kind comments.Those from Frederico Rosselini are still there.

(@DayneReast) Dayne Reast said:

February 28th, 2012 (1:27pm) PST

Eva. It is easy! All they do is give a 3, give the required comment, then delete the comment. The rating stays there, but not the comment. I tested it out on Mr.6, an dsure enough that is how it works. So, anonymous voting 6 and below is still possible (assuming e-mail notifcation is off)

(@Maligne) Eva Lechner said:

February 28th, 2012 (1:26pm) PST

The next one who is just ruining my pictures voting 1 and 2!I think also this is a person with multiple accounts.
Please,check Herb Johnsen's voting history!

(@DayneReast) Dayne Reast said:

February 28th, 2012 (1:18pm) PST

@Wolf, I agree that the trolls are the biggest problem, as so many have noted.
However, I was commenting on those people who were disappointed that their pictures were no longer top-rated by trying to politely say that perhaps they should not have been top in the first place.

(@Maligne) Eva Lechner said:

February 28th, 2012 (1:14pm) PST

One of my pictures has got 2 without a comment,how is it possible?

(@PhotosEcosse) Barbara Jones said:

February 28th, 2012 (12:54pm) PST

There are several members on here with no profile details, and no images. Check their voting history.....many have a bunch of 10's...and a bundle of 3-4-5-6...I suspect these are ""photographers"" with multiple accounts, giving their own work a 10, then trashing anyone in their way !! Same old, same old........

(@shuggie) Karl Williams said:

February 28th, 2012 (12:52pm) PST

Good call, Peter - a decay rate would be a definite advantage to keep things fresh. (we're back on the subject of wives again ..)

(@AForns) Alfred Forns said:

February 28th, 2012 (12:50pm) PST

Amazing Wolf !!!!!Has to be a hacker of some sort or someone that really knows!!Wonder if the staff could just take those votes away !!
In a previous post I said they should take out anything under six?

(@CreativeIsland) Peter Baumgarten said:

February 28th, 2012 (12:44pm) PST

Thanks, Karl! ...and I'm fairly certain my wife is not commuting across the pond to spend time with you. Given the distance I think I'd notice.
I'd like to throw something else out there...
I think this site needs a decay rate (don't throw anything at me!). I have to admit I'm already tired of viewing the same photos on the first few pages for three days in a row. They're fantastic, but I want to see new stuff end up there as well. In a month from now I can see the first 200 photos being rated at 9.00000001 to 9.99999999. I'll get frustrated looking for newer photos in the 7s and 8s and won't bother doing it. You've got to keep it fresh!

(@pandora) pandora said:

February 28th, 2012 (12:42pm) PST

I just guess the big unknown has his/her fun reading our discussion and celebrates each and any excitement. there has to be changed something very quickly. otherwise that funny game will go on :o/

(@wolfademeit) Wolf Ademeit said:

February 28th, 2012 (12:35pm) PST

@Dayne,
the problem is not the voting on a single photo… someone run through my whole gallery and voted a 3 on every available picture in a couple of seconds…
I think that has nothing to do with 'this picture is not perfect and my rate is a 6 or 7'… this is one of the oldest way to trash pictures (or more photographers) ratings on sites with a voting system like this…

(@shuggie) Karl Williams said:

February 28th, 2012 (12:32pm) PST

I see what you mean now, Peter - I hadn't read your original post. Makes sense! And I didn't know your wife's dressing habits - I based the remark on my wife's dressing habits. We're not by chance married to the same woman are we?
Regarding the trolls - we are doing exactly the right thing by exposing them one by one - well done Eva! Yes, it'll be a long hard row to hoe - but, with the site management's help on the analysis and transparency-tweaking side, we'll get there in the end. Look on the bright side - at least they now know they're being watched - and furthermore, we don't have some inflexible Admin called Diana endlessly repeating the mantra that trolling doesn't exist!

(@DayneReast) Dayne Reast said:

February 28th, 2012 (12:07pm) PST

What's the problem here with photos falling down the top-rated list?!? Is it the unwarranted 10? (Personally, I only ever give a 10 for photos that absolutely have that WOW factor.) Or is it the 6 that is deserved? (Personally, I have given 6, which is still better than average in my book, when I felt that was the right rating.) When the number of votes is low, it is possible that some photos appear at the top that do not truly deserve to be there (no disrespect to the photographers who love their photo and are probably overjoyed that they are at the top momentarily!), or disappear forever in the depths. By law of averages, photos will eventually settle at their deserved rating. That is completely fair!
The real issue is more how you get your photos seen so that they can be rated (and the trolls of course, but that is another subject!). Ultimately, that can only be done by following other photographers, and more importantly being followed by them. Or, having some page to show random choices.

(@Nalini) Alex Greenshpun said:

February 28th, 2012 (11:55am) PST

At this time, I think you guys should really add a box right next to the comment to show the vote given. This way the trolls will have a harder time.

(@Nalini) Alex Greenshpun said:

February 28th, 2012 (11:52am) PST

If you keep the 1-10 voting system you will have to accept that you're keeping the trolls. There will be constant "hunts" for the new abusers and it will be just a never-ending journey in this micro-samsara.
Karl's suggestion makes a lot of sense, yet I still think the best way to solve this is to create a system based on favorites, likes and views. This is not a competition, but a site to share our works and discover inspiring works by others.

(@CreativeIsland) Peter Baumgarten said:

February 28th, 2012 (11:49am) PST

In response to Karl's comment, I didn't overlook this flaw in my argument. In my original posting 3 days ago I stated that a new posting would stay in the New section regardless of whether it got voted on or not. Once voted on it would also take its place in the Top Rated section, but NOT be removed from the New section.
And how did you know my wife's dressing habits?

(@rdp) Rob Duncan said:

February 28th, 2012 (11:47am) PST

Yes, this is very frustrating. You post a picture, and for a few moments it is the top rated photo on the site. Then someone comes along, are the jealous? do they really not like your photo? are they just bored and want to bum someone out? and boom your photo drops into no-mans land. The thing is, art is in the eye of the beholder, but in todays world, so many people that may or may not even be interested in art are voting. I rally feel that if you vote, it should require a legitimate comment along with it. Otherwise the vote does not count. I personally don't like rating art, I think it is not a fair analysis of someone work. That is kinda like back in art class when the teacher would give you an A B C D or F grade on your drawing, how is this possible?

(@Maligne) Eva Lechner said:

February 28th, 2012 (11:39am) PST

Thanks for your kind comments who hide your five bad notes (3 )to my pictures Frederico!For my other pictures you have been more generous and voted 5! How could you write "Bellissima"."Molto bene" and so on and vote 3???Could you explain me this,please?I guess you are one of the dislikers who hit every photo of mine on 500 px.Do you have fun doing it and why???
That's what I sent Frederico,he has my comment of course deleted!

To Wolf..
Someone recognises your talent, as one of the best photographers here on 72dpi...ENVY is the word...and they wish to bring you down. Personally, I think the beautiful animals you photograph so well have a far better nature than humans !

(@wolfademeit) Wolf Ademeit said:

February 28th, 2012 (10:54am) PST

right now someone starts to downrated all my uploadd photos with a 3… no comments why…

(@shuggie) Karl Williams said:

February 28th, 2012 (10:45am) PST

Both Peter and Kim are absolutely right, but they have both overlooked the flaw in their argument: that an initial 9 or 10 will get them onto the front page but an 8 following a few seconds later will probably bury the image in the pile - this is what happens when the average vote is based on a small number of votes.
As I mentioned in a previous post, the best way around this is to "stabilise" the running average by multiplying it by the standard "sample size" corrector of SQRT[(n-1)/n] - or the equivalent version of it which doesn't result in the first vote being multiplied by zero, i.e. SQRT[n/(n+1)]. Sure, the "corrected" running average will fluctuate a bit in the first few votes, but nowhere near as much as the "uncorrected" running average. Furthermore, a stabilsed running average is less sensitive to troll attack - which is always an advantage!
Now - the commenting rule which might be added: smooth the way for any negatives by starting with the positives (e.g. Wow, I just love your wife's dress ..... but does she really think a size 10 dress on a size 16 body is fooling anyone?)

(@Ribbi) ribbi the artist said:

February 28th, 2012 (10:42am) PST

I agree with sas, latest photos should be latest photos...
Maybe another list with unrated pictures seperatly?

(@CorrieWhite) said:

February 28th, 2012 (10:40am) PST

As long as photos can be rated down, trolls will take advantage.I think the only way is to find a way to rate Up only.

(@sasastro) sas astro said:

February 28th, 2012 (10:30am) PST

maybe latest photos should be just that - regardless of whether they have been rated or not

(@Fengari) Kim Baudart said:

February 28th, 2012 (9:40am) PST

I agree with Peter. This makes 'photo gangs' a bit of a necessity (depending on how you define 'photo gangs' of course). If you want more than one person to vote or comment on your picture, the only choice you have is to find people who are willing to follow you and comment on new pictures you post. I try to build an 'honest' gang, by voting and commenting honestly, and following the people who return the favour (if I like enough of their work). But they won't get me new viewers, as people will never see my pictures which get buried deeply in the 'rated' pile, as my followers also rate me honestly. I know for sure I would get more views and better scores, getting me even more views, if I was to vote more 10's, but then the feedback I would get would not be honest and so, not worth anything to me.

(@CreativeIsland) Peter Baumgarten said:

February 28th, 2012 (8:57am) PST

The fact that a "Voting Survival Guide" is being written tends to indicate this site is keeping the 1-10 system. Any voting system has its problems.
For me the biggest issue is still the fact that a single vote (anything less than a 10) immediately removes a 'new' photo and buries it deep in the 'top-rated' pages.
I've posted suggestions regarding this in previous comments sections so I won't mention those here. This is a flaw that will likely lead to me leaving this site. The reality is that every one of us, posts here with the hope that as many people as possible will view our photos. I hope admin sees this as an issue irrespective of the voting issue.
Cheers!